SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(Gau) 120

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Aftab H. Saikia and C.R. Sarma, JJ.
The Headmasters/Teachers-in-Charge Association – Appellants
Vs.
Commissioner/Secretary (Education) Govt. of Manipur and Ors. – Respondent
Decided On: 17.02.2009

An unregistered association lacks the legal entity to maintain an appeal under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Headnote:

Regularization - Seniority Dispute - [Societies Registration Act, 1860, Article 226 of the Constitution]

Fact of the Case:

The appellant association sought regularization of their services as Headmasters, which were denied by the State of Manipur. The State appointed private respondents as Headmasters, leading to the appellant's appeal.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the appellant association, being unregistered, lacked the legal entity to maintain the appeal. The court also upheld the State's decision on the seniority dispute.

Issues: Regularization of services, seniority dispute, maintainability of appeal by unregistered association

Ratio Decidendi: The court dismissed the appeal on the grounds of the association's lack of legal entity and upheld the State's decision on the seniority dispute.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed due to the unregistered association's lack of legal entity and the court upheld the State's decision on the seniority dispute.

JUDGMENT

Aftab. H. Saikia, J.

1. Heard Dr. N.K. Singh, Learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. F. Ahmed Learned Counsel representing the Association/appellant as well as Mr. S. Sarma, learned senior Government Advocate appearing on behalf of official respondent/State of Manipur and others.

2. This writ appeal is directed against the common judgment and order dated 12.9.1997 passed by the learned Single Judge in a batch of writ petitions being Civil Rule No. 300/97 alongwith other Civil Rules (The Headmasters/Teachers in-charge Association and Ors. v. State of Manipur and Ors.).

3. The basic grievance of the appellant as demonstrated in this writ appeal is that although the services of the members of the appellant association were utilized and exploited by the respondent-State by allowing them to work as in-charge Headmasters in the respective upgraded junior High Schools in the State of Manipur, their services were not regularized as Headmasters and denying such regularization of their services, the Commissioner of Education, Government of Manipur issued the impugned order dated 4.3.1997 appointing the private respondents herein as Headmasters in those Upgraded Junior High School on promotion. While those impugned orders were challenged before the writ court, the learned Single Judge by the impugned common judgment and order dated 12.7.1997, rejected the contention of the appellants holding that the members of the appellant association were found to be much junior to those private respondents keeping in view the stand taken by the Government to the effect that the Departmental Promotion Committee ('DPC') so held for such promotion for the post of Headmasters in the Upgraded Junior High Schools found those promotees to be seniors to the members of the Association.

4. Dr. Singh Learned Senior Counsel, in support of this writ appeal and assailing the impugned common judgment and order passed by writ court, has forcefully contended that the learned Single Judge committed an error of law and on facts in not making a close scrutiny as regards the seniority of the members of the appellant herein. According to him, since they had duly been appointed as in-charge of the Headmasters and that too they had served in that capacity for a considerable length of period, they are entitled to get regular Headmastership and the denial of such benefit of regularization, resulted in arbitrariness and discrimination and the same would adversely affect their pensionary benefits.

5. Confronting the submissions and contentions made on behalf of the appellant-Association and opening his arguments on behalf of the State, at the very outset, Mr. Sarma, learned State Counsel, has placed on record an oral submission as a preliminary objections as regards maintainability of this writ appeal filed by the appellant Association, namely, the Headmasters/Teachers in-charge Association of All Manipur Upgraded Junior High School, Head Office at Lamka. According to him, this appeal presented by the Association is not maintainable due to the simple reason that this Association is not a registered Association and there is nothing on record to indicate that this Association was ever registered one. Raising this technical point, Mr. Sarma has strongly urged that admittedly this is not a public interest litigation. It is also a fact that the appellant Association is not registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 or any other statute. The Association, not being a registered one, is therefore not a legal entity which can sue or be sued in its name. Significantly the aggrieved individual teachers who preferred the other writ petitions namely Civil Rule No. 327/97 (A.S. Khangoi and Ors. v. State of Manipur and Ors.), Civil Rule No. 356/97 (R.S. Henry v. State of Manipur and Ors.) and Civil Rule No. 355/97 (W. Dolendra Singh and Ors. v. State of Manipur and Ors.) did not move any appeal questioning the validity, and correctness of the impugned common judgment.

6. In suppo



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top